Peter Maydell <peter.mayd...@linaro.org> writes: > On Mon, 25 May 2020 at 13:32, Paolo Bonzini <pbonz...@redhat.com> wrote: >> >> On 25/05/20 07:50, Markus Armbruster wrote: >> > Peter Maydell <peter.mayd...@linaro.org> writes: >> > >> >> On Mon, 18 May 2020 at 06:04, Markus Armbruster <arm...@redhat.com> wrote: >> >>> These devices are optional, and enabled by property "enable-bitband". >> >>> armv7m_instance_init() creates them unconditionally, because the >> >>> property has not been set then. armv7m_realize() realizes them only >> >>> when the property is true. Works, although it leaves unrealized >> >>> devices hanging around in the QOM composition tree. Affects machines >> >>> microbit, mps2-an505, mps2-an521, musca-a, and musca-b1. >> >>> >> >>> Bury the unwanted devices by making armv7m_realize() unparent them. >> >>> Visible in "info qom-tree"; here's the change for microbit: >> >> >> >> What does "bury" mean here? To me it implies "they still >> >> exist but we've stuck them in a hole somewhere and covered >> >> them up", but the qom-tree delta suggests we've actually >> >> really deleted them? >> > >> > We really delete them now. >> > >> > "They've been lying dead in the streets; give them a decent burial". >> > >> > Would you like me to s/Bury/Delete/? >> >> "Bury unwanted" -> "Dispose of unused"? > > Yeah, delete or dispose of would be clearer I think.
Okay, the subjects are short enough to accomodate a change to 'Delete unused "..." devices'. Thanks!
